Vladimir Putin — Part 1: The enigmatic Russian leader will need to show statesmanship in the Syrian crisis by Miguel A. Faria, MD

Journal/Website: 
Exclusive for HaciendaPublishing.com
Article Type: 
Article
Published Date: 
Saturday, April 8, 2017

I write these words and I shudder because as I read the BBC headlines and reports in the early morning hours I learned that President Trump ordered, and the U.S. has launched, a devastating missile strike on a Syrian airbase. The American attack is in retaliation for the Syrian chemical attack on a rebel-held town in northwestern Syria a few days ago in which at least 80 of their own Syrian people, including dozens of women and children, were killed. Here is how the BBC reported the U.S. missile launch:

Fifty-nine Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from two US Navy ships in the Mediterranean. Six people were killed, the Syrian army said. It is the first direct US military action against forces commanded by Syria's president. The Kremlin, which backs Bashar al-Assad, has condemned the strike.

Up until now Trump and Putin have tried to collaborate in Syria at least against the areas held by the terrorist Islamic Caliphate (IS). How Putin reacts to this American Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad with Vladimir Putinunilateral action, devastating for his protégé and main ally in the region, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad (photo, left: pictured with Vladimir Putin), may help decipher the long-term political and military intentions of the enigmatic Vladimir Putin.

Following the U.S. airfield strike, China released a neutral message calling for restraint. The UK, Nato, and Japan supported the American action, while Iran, Syria, and Russia condemned it. In the Middle East, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey strongly supported the American missile strike. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated: "President Trump sent a strong and clear message today that the use and spread of chemical weapons will not be tolerated. Israel fully supports President Trump's decision and hopes that this message of resolve in the face of the Assad regime's horrific actions will resonate not only in Damascus, but in Tehran, Pyongyang and elsewhere." Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, who had been a strong opponent of the Assad regime and had already denounced the Syrian chemical attack a few days earlier, also supported the American action as “strongly positive” and his foreign ministry spokesman stated that “Turkey would fully support steps that would ensure accountability for the Syrian regime.”

But what do these developments mean for Putin’s and Russia’s aspirations in the Middle East? Consider the fact that Putin has his sights on building an Eastern Mediterranean power base centered in Syria, relying on the acquiescence and assistance of his ally Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.

Russia has plans for building military bases in Egypt and just recently had been given the go-ahead by Assad to build an offensive submarine and naval base in Tartus, Syria, a development that would have tilted the balance of power in the Mediterranean towards Russia. Those with knowledge of geopolitics and history would recognize that Putin’s actions in the Eastern Mediterranean have been unprecedented by the Russians. The Soviets attempted these Catherine the Great with Grigory Potemkinactions in Egypt and Libya and ultimately failed. In centuries past, Catherine the Great and her all-powerful minister and lover, Grigory Potemkin (1739-1791) [photo, right], and their successors, Tsars Nicholas I and Alexander II, only dreamed of projecting Russian power through the Straits with the building of naval bases in the straits and the Mediterranean that could challenge the Western powers. The Ottoman Turks, supported by England and France, prevented the fulfillment of that Russian dream, a dream that would have been a nightmare for the British fleet, French possessions in the Mediterranean, and the European balance of power.
 
Putin had been fulfilling a statesmanship role in the Middle East, easing tensions with Russia’s traditional enemy Turkey, increasing Russian influence in the region, and projecting Russian power in Syria and planning to do the same in Egypt and Libya as well — with the help and connivance of Syria and Iran. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has continued to court Putin and has even offered the Russians an airbase in Iran. This generosity of course is a quid pro quo arrangement for Iran to continue to exert power in Syria though Hezbollah, as well as asking for Russian acquiescence in building a railroad passing through Syria allowing Tehran access to the Mediterranean Sea.

After the American missile strike, it appears the U.S has made reinvigorated allies in the region besides Israel and Jordan. Turkey’s Tayyip Erdogan may be at the forefront of that alliance  — this despite the capricious animosity of the European Union (EU) towards the Turkish president. Closer ties between the U.S and Turkey is practical not only because of their common fight against ISIS but also because of Turkey's traditional fear of Russia, a fear that spans the time farther back than the communist USSR to tsarist times. Russia has been for centuries the natural enemy of Turkey for geopolitical and historic reasons — namely the attempted use of power in the region and the Russians' repeated efforts for unconditional passage, if not outright possession and even annexation, of the straits between the Black Sea Bosporus Straitand the Mediterranean. In the Crimean War (1853-56), France and England supported the Turks and fought Tsarist Russia to preserve the littoral and straits in the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara (photo, left) of the flagging Ottoman Empire, “The Sick Man of Europe” — from falling in the hands of the expansionist Russians. It appears that Trump may have capitalized on this history and has managed to force a wedge between Erdogan and Putin with the U.S. attack on the Syrian airfield. But was it worth it?

I had hoped the Trump-Putin cordiality, in general, and the close military cooperation in Syria against ISIS, in particular, could have continued, but that may not be the case. The Russians, though, may be forced to cooperate, as ISIS and Islamic terrorism target not only America and the West, but also Russia, as happened in the suicide metro bombing attack of April 4, 2017 by a young Moslem Kyrgyz terrorist in St. Petersburg. Russia’s underbelly is surrounded by Islamic nations and territories, not all friendly to the Russian Federation. Moreover both Trump and Putin along with Teresa May of Great Britain and Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey have been at the forefront opposing the New World Order globalization, forced secularization, collectivization and regimentation campaign of the EU and the internationalist elites.

For this reason I think the strike on Syria was a mistake: ISIS is the immediate enemy, not Syria; and the NWO globalization is the long-term enemy, not nationalist Russia. Trump was misled by his newer, neoconservative and internationalist advisors. I only hope that he will gain some political capital out of it, but otherwise that he returns to his instincts and common sense, and to the promises he made to his conservative supporters, who elected him against all odds.

With the globalization drive and the new Syrian crisis ahead, Russia will see itself more thanever surrounded by hostile powers, and Putin will have to decide who are and who are not his friends and separate friends from foes. Trump will need to do the same. The message has now been sent to Syria and other rogue nations that violation of treaties to which both the violator and the U.S. are signatories (i.e., in the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993) will not be tolerated; committing war crimes in theVladimir Putin process, and in a war in which the U.S. is also involved, will have dire consequences.

Putin (photo, right) may also take home the message that further aggression toward his neighbors and seizure of territories by force, as he did in the Crimea, will lead to untoward effects for Russia; that the war in the Eastern Ukraine should end; that hostility to his neighbors should cease; and that the national security of the U.S. and its allies will be safeguarded.

North Korea and its dangerous infant terrible, Kim Jong-un, with his tantrums and his restless fingers threatening nuclear war, should also take notice that further missile attacks and provocations towards South Korea and Japan, America’s allies, are acts leading them likewise down the perilous path of a defensive American pre-emptive missile strike; and the same goes for China and its belligerent actions in the disputed islands of the South China Sea.

None of this, we hope for the peace of the world, negates the intention of the United States to have cordial relations with both Russia and China, on one side, and the EU, Great Britain, and Japan, on the other. By the same token, the U.S., should not become the world’s policeman and impose “democracy” in all parts of the world, nor to change its tune to joint the European socialist elites in their campaign of globalization and regimentation. The people worldwide have recently made it clear they yearn for nationalism and the freedom to follow their own road of self-determination, independence, and peace.

Written by Dr. Miguel Faria

Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D. is an Associate Editor in Chief and a World Affairs Editor of Surgical Neurology International (SNI). He is the Author of Cuba in Revolution: Escape From a Lost Paradise (2002). His website is www.haciendapub.com

This article may be cited as: Faria MA. Vladimir Putin — Part 1: The enigmatic Russian leader will need to show statesmanship in the Syrian crisis. HaciendaPublishing.com, April 7, 2017. Available from: http://www.haciendapublishing.com/articles/vladimir-putin-%E2%80%94-part-1-enigmatic-russian-leader-will-need-show-statesmanship-syrian-crisis

Similar versions of this article appeared in GOPUSA, April 10, and in the Telegraph (Macon), April 17, 2017.

Copyright ©2017 Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (5 votes)
Comments on this post

Obsessed with Putin as enemy!

In today’s article in Accuracy in Media (AIM),“Billionaire Funds Overthrow of Capitalism,” Cliff Kincaid exposes the the agenda of the socialist environmentalists. Incidentally, Accuracy in Media that Kincaid leads as Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism, is an excellent organization that holds the liberal media’s feet to the fire, exposing bias and propaganda attempting to pass as objective reporting using excellent documentation and published articles.

But returning to the article, Kincaid correctly documents: “‘System Change, Not Climate Change’ is the demand being made by the Party for Socialism and Liberation in regard to Saturday’s Peoples Climate March. ‘Only socialism can solve the climate crisis,’ they say. It appears that the organizers of the march agree, since the old Moscow-funded Communist Party is listed as one of the official ‘partners of the group sponsoring the April 29th demonstration in the nation’s capital.’"

Kincaid goes on to list all the left-wing organizations involved, some even affiliates of the American Communist Party (CPUSA), such as the U.S Peace council. The list reads as to the Who is Who in the American communist-socialist-environmentalist spectrum, including American labor unions and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). The expose is worth reading.

Unfortunately, one sentence is out of place, and that is when Kincaid tries to bring in Vladimir Putin into the discussion. He writes, “Russian leader Vladimir Putin would like nothing more than to see the U.S. close down its oil and gas industry and try to run a modern industrial economy on solar panels and windmills.”

It does not matter that Putin has absolutely nothing to do with these socialist & communist radicals and the useful idiot environmentalist wackos. Putin is in fact more opposed to this agenda than the average American Democrat party operative. And when it comes to a number of issues, including both socialism and environmentalism, Putin in the political spectrum is to the far right of the European Union and the Democrat Party, USA.

While Russia since the fall of communism has moved toward conservatism in both the social and economic spheres, the U.S., since the time of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama has moved far to the left. It is the wackos in the environmentalist movements in both Europe and the United States, who have aligned themselves with the socialist & communist ravenous wolves (who would devour them when they are no longer useful). And in the mainstream of politics, the EU and our own Democrat Party are closer to the environmentalist movement and the agenda of the left-wing radical organizations that Kincaid cites than Putin and his party in Russia!

The Cold War with the Soviet Empire is at an end, but some of our conservative friends have not yet come to terms with the collapse of the USSR and the new paradigm. In not accepting the collapse of Soviet communism, they miss the real culprits (e.g., the globalists, collectivists and environmentalist leaders in the EU) and sometimes even point fingers in the wrong and opposite direction.--- MAF

World War III is coming!

Face facts a WW III is inevitable. As long as Syria, Russia and North Korea are aggressors, it's bound to happen. You have Syria gassing their own people, Russia taking Crimea because they can, and North Korea constantly talking about launching missiles and nukes at the U.S. It's time to set those three Countries straight. China will not get involved due to the fact of a huge amount of jobs [it has] thanks to the U.S. They don't want to see massive layoffs due to U.S Company's hiring China's manufacturing sector pulling out. That would mean big problems for the country and it's people's employment. That would be disastrous for their economy. So the question remains who will help the U.S with their fight. I for one hope Canada supports them in that fight, after all Canada relies on their protection when it comes to a nuclear attack.

Progressive Conservatives would support them in a heart beat but Liberals [are] a different story. That remains to be seen in coming weeks or months. So is Canada an Ally in battle or an Ally behind the scenes? That's the difference between fighting side by side or being cheerleaders on the sidelines because we know how much Liberals like to stay on the sidelines. --- Calvin Stevenson, under the Telegraph (Macon) version, April 17, 2017

Attacking Syria or ISIS?

Indeed it is good to read a well balanced article. Sending the world a message that we will no longer sit on the sidelines in our weakness and our condemning words can be viewed positively. There is a new sheriff in town. But is this the battle we pick?

Do we aid ISIS when we attack their enemy? Assad has never come to America, nor would he, to attack America. ISIS has had its terrorists attack us. ISIS is the far greater threat, and Assad is the enemy of our enemy. Do we now fight both Assad and Syria? If so, are we to install another regime for another country? The likelihood of that working out favorably appears poor; we make both sides our enemy.

Chemical weapons use is terrible, undeniably, but we must choose our battles wisely or we become the world police— as Dr. Faria has noted. Most countries will see us as the arrogant bully roaming about the world dropping bombs or missiles, for atrocities abound.

How will Russia react to their ally in their backyard attacked? Gathering our allies but at what cost? We may need Russia in our fight against Muslim terrorists. Besides they are guilty of taking Crimea and making war in Ukraine, which seems a far worse crime than being a strategic ally of a bad dictator fighting ISIS. Russia is our enemy, but is this the battle we choose to acknowledge it? I agree this is a mistake.
-----
Dr. Faria: I agree with your views. According to Dr. Steve Pieczenik, this is about China, not Syria; but if this is so, where does Russia stand in all this smoke and mirrors strategic deception?

This is Dr. Blaylock's analysis on this video: "I think the analysis by Pieczenik and Corsi is the correct one. Trump needed to stem this idiocy about he and the Russians being in collusion, and this implied rift between Putin and Trump will play a role in that. It is of note that he notified the Russians of what he was about to do so that the Russian soldier would not be injured and to let Putin he was going to play this gambit. As Pieczenik says, Trump is a very smart player and used what he wrote about in the Art of the Deal against the neocons and the left pundits. Listen to these two guys and see what you think. I have some interesting analysis of the entire Russian episode I am reviewing now. It throws a whole new light on the Deep State, the neocons and an often forgotten factor — the organized crime syndicates."

Putin, the Syrian Crisis and the Power Elite!

First, for the outer layer of the onion. It appears on the surface that Trump has fallen into the Power Elite's trap by attacking Assad. On first look, it is obvious that Assad had absolutely nothing to gain by a gas attack and everything to lose. I don’t buy that he is a loose cannon madman— that is, a lunatic. Assad is a trained ophthalmologist and known to be quite intelligent and has ruled Syria for 30 years. I suspect the CIA and Saudi Arabia are behind this gas attack event and this is part of their continuing support of the so-called rebels, in essence, supporting the Neocons idea of regime change for designing the New World Order. Michael Savage made a good case for this not being a sarin gas attack, as one cannot handle victims’ clothing and be around their bodies as sarin can easily penetrate the skin and even in very small concentrations can kill. He proposes something like phosgene gas, which would be obtained from Saudi Arabia...

Before this event, Assad had both Russia and the US defeating his enemies. Now Russia is withdrawing and the US is taking up the entire battle without the aid of Assad or Russia. Which, to the casual observer means a wider war, greater US military involvement, a massive need for cash to pay for the war (which pleases the hell out of the international bankers) and a more rapid move to eventual economic collapse of the US economy and eventually the world economy. It also paves the way for the one thing that Zbigniew Brzezinski and company (George Soros) wanted and that is the fall of Putin and Russia. This greatly increases the risk of WWIII. That McCain is elated over Trump’s seemingly foolish move can be taken as evidence he may have made a drastic mistake— one we will all pay for. As we peel back the layers of the onion, things may be quite different.

... As for Putin’s fate, the Power Elite (mainly in the person of Zbigniew Brzenziski), is following the grand chessboard strategy in bringing down Putin and marginalizing Russia. Why? Because Russia, under Putin, is a major obstacle to the Power Elite’s plan for a world government and an end of nationalism... Of note, Putin was endorsed by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and even made The Gulag Archipelago required reading in all Russian High Schools. When we look at what Putin has accomplished in Russia it would be the envy of all those who voted for Trump and it explains the 80% approval rating Putin has enjoyed.

Note: This comment is extracted from a larger article by Dr. Blaylock to be posted later today!
----
Dr. Faria replies [Revised April 12, 2017]: I agree with much of what Dr. Blaylock states. I would like to point out that there is no evidence that the CIA or Saudi Arabia was behind the Chemical attack. It would have been foolhardy for either one of them to do so. The CIA under Obama became increasingly corrupt but the Agency knows it will have to change their tune under Trump. The Saudi's are not reliable partners of the NWO and, like the CIA, has much to lose with such a ruse. Must likely it was conducted by Assad without the knowledge of the Russians. Assad himself suffered a humiliating attack from within Damascus itself, which I mentioned elsewhere. He was likely jittery and on the edge, and he, as well as his own father, and Saddam Hussein— all have carried out atrocities against their own people, including chemical attacks. There is no reason to look elsewhere unless evidence points in any other direction.

I agree with Dr. Blaylock that the Power Elite, well-represented by Soros and Brzezinski, have their crosshairs on Vladimir Putin, as the most brilliant and audacious enemy of their NWO, and Trump perhaps joining Putin has caused panic within their ranks. I'm elated to see Dr. Blaylock move closer in my direction regarding his revised views of Vladimir Putin! As to Sen. McCain's elation that in fact is a red flag that Trump may have done the wrong thing and fallen into the Power Elite Trap placing himself at odds with Putin, as if he (and the US) did not have enough enemies!]

Note: Dr. Blaylock has written a full article on the subject about Putin and the Power Elite expressing views similar to my own; it will appear later today; it also appears he has stolen my thunder for my Part 2 article I was planning to write!